CAROLINE MARIE LANCASTER
Ph.D. Candidate, UNC-Chapel Hill
Welcome! I am a Ph.D. candidate and NSF Graduate Research Fellow in the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where I study comparative politics and quantitative methodology.
In my work, I seek to understand how ideology operates in societies. My dissertation analyzes the contextual differences in how nationalist and xenophobic attitudes are combined with other political attitudes across Europe. For more information, click here.
I earned my M.A. from UNC-Chapel Hill in 2018 and my B.A. from Furman University in Greenville, SC in 2015.
NOT SO RADICAL AFTER ALL: IDEOLOGICAL DIVERSITY AMONG RADICAL SUPPORTERS VOTERS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
Political Studies, 2020, 68:3, pp. 600-616
Radical right voters and parties are often characterized as conservative and traditionalist on issues of gender, sexuality, and morality. However, some radical right parties, such as the Dutch Party for Freedom, maintain moderate positions on morality issues. Are radical right supporters still traditionalist? Latent class analysis applied to European Social Survey data from 10 West European countries reveals that radical right supporters belong to three ideologically distinct classes. The fastest growing group is the sexually-modern nativists, who make up about 45% by 2016. Contrary to extant literature, traditionalism no longer appears to be a major motivation for today’s radical right. Instead, immigration and nationalism are now the core common concerns for radical right supporters in Western Europe.
VALUE SHIFT: IMMIGRATION ATTITUDES AND THE SOCIOCULTURAL DIVIDE
British Journal of Political Science, forthcoming
The sociocultural divide in Western Europe is increasingly focused on issues of national identity, namely immigration. It is commonly assumed that opponents of immigration also exhibit conservatism on other sociocultural issues. Yet, recent research suggests that general social conservatism is declining in the region. Do immigration attitudes fit squarely into the sociocultural dimension? I find that gender attitudes are subject to change through both cohort and life cycle effects, while immigration attitudes are stable over the course of the panel and exhibit little variation across cohorts. Further, those born during and after the "postmaterialist revolution" have weakened associations between these two attitudes, while older individuals' attitudes are strongly correlated. The combination of gender egalitarianism and anti-immigrant sentiment may become increasingly common as acceptance of the former spreads, while immigration remains a hotly contested issue.